Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 19:59:09 +0000
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject: Scope-leaping: xa'a, xa'anai (-> xo'u -> bo'u)
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Reply-to: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Message-id: <01HKYFQ2PK360001AL@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 883
Lines: 19

This is a reminder to say that the proposal, originating with pc, of
xa'a [named by Jorge, & NOT xa'a-as-talked-about-by-Djer] as an UI
indicating scope leaping, and xa'anai [originating with me, & named
by Jorge] indicating no scope leaping, still stands (as the chief,
and possibly only, change to the grammar to deal with opacity).

Since the effect of {xa'a}/{xa'anai} concerns ordering in the prenex
of the duhu expressed by the seduhu, and since in a seduhu the prenex
is marked by {zohu}, I suggest {bo'u} and {bo'unai} as the actual
cmavo. These are currently unassigned (according to my list).

I also suggest that in the meantime we give the cmavo new experimental
names {xo'u} and {xo'unai}, in the hope that noone else starts using
them to mean something else, as has happened with {xa'a} [no complaint
intended - who can keep track of all experimental cmavo?].

---
And